Navigating the roads of life can be just as tricky as navigating the roads Down Under, especially as people age.

For many in the over-60s club, driving is synonymous with independence, but it's also a responsibility that one must manage with care.

In one Aussie state, the conversation about older drivers and road safety is heating up, which could mean changes are on the horizon for how seniors maintain their driver's licenses.

Currently, there's no Australia-wide standard for assessing the driving capabilities of older individuals.

However, a recent push in Victoria is aiming to tighten the reins on how seniors renew their driving privileges, following some alarming statistics.

Over the past five years, drivers over the age of 65 have been involved in accidents that resulted in 145 fatalities and 7,080 injuries.

These figures have sparked a debate on whether stricter regulations could potentially save lives.

More stringent regulations for older drivers in Victoria were being urged due to alarming accident statistics involving those aged 65 and above. Credits: Shutterstock

Dr Anita Muñoz from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners is advocating for expanded regulations in Victoria.

‘This is not about discriminating against older people,’ she explained, 'but a recognition that the skills required to drive safely can be lost as we get older.’

The tragic story of Hugh Roberts, a teenager struck by an older driver, added a personal and poignant dimension to the discussion.

His parents, Meiko and Alex, are calling for tougher regulations, highlighting the devastating impact that an accident can have on families.

‘His life was completely messed up because of this old guy driving crazily,’ Ms Roberts said.

‘He shouldn't have been driving,’ Hugh’s father added.

‘Maybe there are 87-year-olds who can drive safely, but you would want to have that checked.’

Rather than being compelled to take a mandatory test, older Victorian drivers only need to disclose any medical condition that might affect their driving ability.

‘It makes me very nervous as a clinician because it is up to the patient to act on my advice and notify VicRoads,’ Dr Kate Gregorevic explained.

She emphasised that driving provides older individuals with freedom and independence, but stressed the importance of an annual driving and medical evaluation.

In contrast, New South Wales has a more stringent measure.

Drivers aged 75 and over must undergo an annual medical test, and those over 85 must pass a practical driving test every two years.

Many elderly NSW drivers opt for a modified license to avoid the on-road tests, which limit their driving distance and may include nighttime restrictions.

Dr Muñoz suggested that annual medical examinations would enable drivers to be informed about health issues that could impact their driving abilities.

On the other hand, Chris Potaris, CEO of Council on the Ageing Victoria and Seniors Rights Victoria, argued that mandatory testing could lead to older drivers giving up their licenses prematurely.

'We continue to support Victoria's approach, which emphasises a driver's behaviour and medical fitness to operate a motor vehicle,' he asserted.

‘Driving should be based on ability, not on age.’

As older drivers in Victoria face discussions about changes to their license requirements, millions of motorists across the state are gearing up for a major shift in licensing regulations.

The proposed alterations, including the introduction of medical assessments for older drivers, have sparked debates about safety and independence among senior citizens.

This move comes as the state is experiencing significant adjustments in its driving regulations, prompting concerns and discussions among older drivers and the broader community.

Key Takeaways

• Calls are increasing for stricter regulations on older drivers in Victoria due to concerning accident statistics involving drivers over 65.
• Disturbing figures show that older drivers were responsible for accidents resulting in 145 deaths and injurious to 7,080 over five years.
• Current Victorian regulations only require older drivers to self-report medical conditions affecting their driving, without mandatory tests.
• In contrast, NSW requires drivers aged 75 and over to undergo an annual medical assessment, and those over 85 must also complete a practical driving test every two years.

What are your thoughts on this proposed change? Do you think this should be applied across the country? Let us know your thoughts and opinions in the comments below.

 

[Duncan M]

Who are they crashing with,Migrants who Vic Roads supply interpreters for their licence test or people distracted phones big screens? We will never know the answer to first question as its against policy to make it available.

 

[Sassafras]

What about all the young people who drive carelessly, drive too closely behind you to you, overtake when it is not safe. etc. They cause far many more accidents than do "old people"!

 

[Sassafras]

It is not discrimination. Yes, you don't have to be over 65 to have a heart attack, but it is more likely in an older person. And young people with medical problems that should prevent them from driving, don't drive.

You're kidding yourself!

 

[LynS]

What about all the young people who drive carelessly, drive too closely behind you to you, overtake when it is not safe. etc. They cause far many more accidents and than do "old people"!

As I said before, this thread is about older drivers and their capability. Certainly there are problems with young drivers, but this thread is addressing the problems with older drivers and there are MANY problems with older drivers.

 

[jaylynne]

I understand what is being said but how,w many accidents and deaths are caused by younger people driving under the influence of drugs, alcohol and reckless driving and speed. Should we not then be informing everyone having an annual driving test or the like? Medical emergencies can occur at any age, yes maybe the older generation is more susceptible but they can occur at any age. I believe the majority of older people are more responsible on the road and if anything are possibly over cautious. This is in my opinion ageist

 

[emjayj59]

Im about to turn 65 and I drive and also still ride a motorcycle. I havent been involved in an accident for over 30 years. I think NSW and QLD have the right idea of medical checks at 75 years and older. Don't put all older people into the same boat, I have seen people well under 65 that shouldn't have been driving. Think about that ppl.

 

[donlaf]

Annual physical for anyone over 80 should be sufficient as in WA. Would like to see relative statistics for all other age groups.

 

[Sassafras]

As I said before, this thread is about older drivers and their capability. Certainly there are problems with young drivers, but this thread is addressing the problems with older drivers and there are MANY problems with older drivers.

What is your problem? The young will be old one day - if they live long enough. Many here have mentioned the culpability of some young drivers.(I guess you will use up your day replying to them.) No-one has said older drivers are immune from driving unsafely, however I'd rather take my chances with older drivers, than younger drivers, many of them who are on drugs and alcohol and think they are "entitled" to do what they like. I guess you fall in the "young" category.

 

[Bob194466]

As an 80 yea old and driving well but seeing the statistics of young and old then then "what's good for the Goose is good for the Ganda", in otherwards, ALL drivers need a regular health check, that would get alcoholics and regular illegal drug users off the roads.
OK?

 

[Phantom55]

is it the number of elderly killed.?.. or the number of elderly at fault in fatal accidents....im always suspicious of statistics .I believe driving records should be taken into consideration

 

[Sassafras]

As an 80 yea old and driving well but seeing the statistics of young and old then then "what's good for the Goose is good for the Ganda", in otherwards, ALL drivers need a regular health check, that would get alcoholics and regular illegal drug users off the roads.
OK?

Well said, I agree with you.

 

[TrishBin]

This article talks about a youngster killed by an older driver. I see no mention of the large number of older people injured or killed by young drivers who don‘t know how to drive safely, according to the road conditions and without a car full of their friends egging them on to speed or overtake for the fun, or in cases where it goes wrong, the hell of it. Older people are often far more experienced than younger ones. This means that they have the knowledge of how to avoid accidents and other traps on our roads. Yes, some older people need to be tested, but having gone through this process after a one off medical incident which had nothing to do with a car and followed an incorrect police report in which the police woman described my husband and not me and wrote that I had MS when I do not and have never been considered for that diagnosis (she could not remember the term Rheumatoid arthritis and so took a stab in the dark). I complained to the police about this because it is now on my file. Almost everything she wrote was incorrect. She did not note that I had avoided any accident with any other car! Nor did she put most of the episode that occurred in the report. So be warned. They described me as stooped and using a walking stick. I am most certainly not stooped, nor do I use a walking stick. I have one in my car in case my husband has forgotten his! He is stooped, uses a stick and has the mobility issues she put in her report. He had come to collect me and my belongings while my car was taken for repairs, although I could probably have driven home in it. It seems that they don’t write down the facts at the time. But try to remember later in the day at the end of their shift. No matter that this report is almost completely incorrect the verdict was that they saw no problem and were not going to correct the errors. Now it follows me! When combined with a medical incident, I had to see a string of doctors and then take a test with an OT ($205.00) and a practical with the OT and a driving instructor. ($620.00] So a total cost of well over $800.00 for the full tests. How many pensioners can afford that every two years or so? Even though I have some extras cover for OT, I did not get back anything like half of it.
Thus any government thinking of bringing in practical tests has to make them affordable for the older person. They also know and all GPs should know that if they consider someone should not be driving they can inform the department of motor vehicles or DIT as it now is and that person will be informed that they are not to drive until they have taken the required tests. This often is a medical, which those of us with any medical conditions have to take every year. It is not onerous to see your GP, who knows your medical history and whether or not you are well enough to drive. My father at 94 was still allowed to drive in the daytime to the shops so he could get his food or meet up for a coffee. Yes it was limited but it was all he needed. If he had other things he needed to do one of the family would take him. That sort of thing is only logical.
But it was not an old person doing 200km/hr who crashed into those two poor young women in the tunnel. Nor was it an old idiot doing 177km/hr in a 60km/hr zone who caused another horrendous crash. Please don’t blame older people for all the trouble with accidents and injuries. Let’s have all the statistics in the open so we can compare the number of drivers per age group to the number of accidents per age group and also the number of injuries and fatalities per group. Stating numbers just for older folk is hardly fair. They may have more injuries perhaps but that has yet to be shown and their bodies do tend to be more frail. This may account for an increase in injuries. If memory serves I have read a number of articles in which older people were merely passengers and not the driver in an accident. Has this been taken into account in the figures so blithely stated?
I will believe that older drivers are on the whole worse than the younger ones only when you statistically prove it to be so and not when a couple of figures are cherry picked to make them look bad.

 

[Luckyus]

‘This is not about discriminating against older people,’ That's exactly what this dozy bint is saying. Personally every bloody driver under thirty and on "P" plates should be tested every year.

 

[Sassafras]

This article talks about a youngster killed by an older driver. I see no mention of the large number of older people injured or killed by young drivers who don‘t know how to drive safely, according to the road conditions and without a car full of their friends egging them on to speed or overtake for the fun, or in cases where it goes wrong, the hell of it. Older people are often far more experienced than younger ones. This means that they have the knowledge of how to avoid accidents and other traps on our roads. Yes, some older people need to be tested, but having gone through this process after a one off medical incident which had nothing to do with a car and followed an incorrect police report in which the police woman described my husband and not me and wrote that I had MS when I do not and have never been considered for that diagnosis (she could not remember the term Rheumatoid arthritis and so took a stab in the dark). I complained to the police about this because it is now on my file. Almost everything she wrote was incorrect. She did not note that I had avoided any accident with any other car! Nor did she put most of the episode that occurred in the report. So be warned. They described me as stooped and using a walking stick. I am most certainly not stooped, nor do I use a walking stick. I have one in my car in case my husband has forgotten his! He is stooped, uses a stick and has the mobility issues she put in her report. He had come to collect me and my belongings while my car was taken for repairs, although I could probably have driven home in it. It seems that they don’t write down the facts at the time. But try to remember later in the day at the end of their shift. No matter that this report is almost completely incorrect the verdict was that they saw no problem and were not going to correct the errors. Now it follows me! When combined with a medical incident, I had to see a string of doctors and then take a test with an OT ($205.00) and a practical with the OT and a driving instructor. ($620.00] So a total cost of well over $800.00 for the full tests. How many pensioners can afford that every two years or so? Even though I have some extras cover for OT, I did not get back anything like half of it.
Thus any government thinking of bringing in practical tests has to make them affordable for the older person. They also know and all GPs should know that if they consider someone should not be driving they can inform the department of motor vehicles or DIT as it now is and that person will be informed that they are not to drive until they have taken the required tests. This often is a medical, which those of us with any medical conditions have to take every year. It is not onerous to see your GP, who knows your medical history and whether or not you are well enough to drive. My father at 94 was still allowed to drive in the daytime to the shops so he could get his food or meet up for a coffee. Yes it was limited but it was all he needed. If he had other things he needed to do one of the family would take him. That sort of thing is only logical.
But it was not an old person doing 200km/hr who crashed into those two poor young women in the tunnel. Nor was it an old idiot doing 177km/hr in a 60km/hr zone who caused another horrendous crash. Please don’t blame older people for all the trouble with accidents and injuries. Let’s have all the statistics in the open so we can compare the number of drivers per age group to the number of accidents per age group and also the number of injuries and fatalities per group. Stating numbers just for older folk is hardly fair. They may have more injuries perhaps but that has yet to be shown and their bodies do tend to be more frail. This may account for an increase in injuries. If memory serves I have read a number of articles in which older people were merely passengers and not the driver in an accident. Has this been taken into account in the figures so blithely stated?
I will believe that older drivers are on the whole worse than the younger ones only when you statistically prove it to be so and not when a couple of figures are cherry picked to make them look bad.

Hear, hear. The thing with statistics is that you can get the statistics to say whatever you want. This is shown by some of the posters here, who are extremely biased against older drivers.

 

[Sassafras]

As I said before, this thread is about older drivers and their capability. Certainly there are problems with young drivers, but this thread is addressing the problems with older drivers and there are MANY problems with older drivers.

 

[IAN3005]

Received a communication from RMS for another test for another $1,000 dollars.... do they think we are made of money?
It's less than a year since the last $1,000. This will drag on til January 2025

 

[Spondonian]

IT's easy to pick out one statistic to make a statement , but it means nothing unless you show all the relevant statistics to compare
Ps I have yearly medical 'over 75yrs ' and agree with having that .

 

[grays146]

This is a very one size fits all response.
The report gives no information about % by overall age groups,, and by far the most accidents involve younger drivers and those driving on International licences.
Apparently in parts of Africa, students just 'buy' a licence and then come here on a worers Visa using it for 12 months!!!
There needs to be proper evaluation by EACH AGE range, and recognition of the impact loss of a licnece has on the mental state of the elderly driver now deprived of the use of his/her car. Do a proper incident evaluation by 10-year age groupings before ANY changes, then,, the NSW process for those over 80 would be justified, cost free because of the high charges for physical OT assesed on road reviews.
When reviewed on real data for the over 80's, it is likely their rate of accidents/deaths will be less than the pre-20 group. Deal with then first!